[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnustep-cvs] GNUstep Testfarm Results

From: Gregory John Casamento
Subject: Re: [Gnustep-cvs] GNUstep Testfarm Results
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:14:32 -0700 (PDT)


Just to add my $0.02...

The gcc-2.95 compiler is quite old, we should consider problems that arise because of issues relating to gcc 2.95 to be non-release critical for GNUstep. 

We shouldn't go out of our way to break GNUstep for gcc 2.95, but we should not bend over backwards to fix issues related to it either.

Later, GJC
Gregory John Casamento

----- Original Message ----
From: Andrew Ruder <address@hidden>
To: Developer GNUstep <address@hidden>
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 8:41:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Gnustep-cvs] GNUstep Testfarm Results

On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 04:02:01PM -0600, Adam Fedor wrote:
> I narrowed it down to one method, but that doesn't really help much.
> On the solaris, I'm still using the 2.95 compiler, mostly to check for
> backward compatibility. Perhaps I should just upgrade and start
> deprecating support for gcc 2.95?

The way I see it, gcc 3.0 was released on June 18, 2001.  This is more
than 5 years ago.  In the technology world, that is a very long, long
time.  If there's really platforms that don't have gcc 3 or higher,
maybe it is just time for those platforms to be depracated (or they can
use an older version of gnustep).

Just my two cents,
Andrew Ruder <address@hidden>

Gnustep-dev mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]